Sudan has filed a case against the United Arab Emirates (UAE) at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), accusing it of violating the Genocide Convention by allegedly providing military and financial support to the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF). The filing, made on Wednesday, asserts that the UAE has played a direct role in enabling the RSF’s brutal campaign in Sudan’s ongoing war. In response, the UAE has dismissed the allegations as baseless and labeled the move a “publicity stunt.”
Serious Allegations at the UN’s Top Court
The Sudanese government contends that the UAE’s backing of the RSF has contributed to grave human rights violations, including genocide, murder, rape, forced displacement, and the destruction of property. The case specifically highlights atrocities committed against the Masalit people, an ethnic group in the Darfur region that has suffered severe violence since the conflict began in April 2023.
“The UAE has been complicit in the genocide on the Masalit through its extensive financial, political, and military support for the rebel RSF militia,” Sudan argued in its filing to the ICJ.
Sudan has also requested the court to impose urgent “provisional measures”—temporary orders meant to prevent further crimes against the Masalit people while the case is being heard.
UAE Rejects Accusations, Calls for Dismissal of Case
In a strongly worded statement, the UAE rejected Sudan’s claims, arguing that the accusations lacked any legal or factual basis. The Emirati government insisted that the lawsuit was a diversionary tactic to shift focus away from alleged atrocities committed by the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF).
“This case is nothing more than a cynical publicity stunt aimed at deflecting attention from the well-documented complicity of the Sudanese Armed Forces in the widespread atrocities devastating Sudan and its people,” the UAE’s statement read.
Emphasizing its commitment to peace, the UAE reiterated its calls for an immediate ceasefire and expressed confidence that the ICJ would dismiss the case outright.
A Conflict Rooted in Long-Standing Tensions
The war in Sudan erupted in April 2023 following a power struggle between the RSF and the Sudanese military. The fighting has devastated the country, killing more than 24,000 people and displacing over 14 million—approximately 30% of the population—according to United Nations estimates. An additional 3.2 million Sudanese have fled to neighboring countries, exacerbating the region’s humanitarian crisis.
Both the RSF and the Sudanese military have been accused of committing human rights abuses throughout the conflict, with independent monitors reporting indiscriminate attacks on civilians, mass killings, and sexual violence.
The filing against the UAE comes at a pivotal moment, as the RSF recently announced the formation of a parallel government after making significant territorial gains. The Sudanese military, however, has pushed back with counteroffensives, escalating the conflict.
Evidence of UAE’s Alleged RSF Support
International monitors, including the U.S.-funded Conflict Observatory, have tracked evidence suggesting that the UAE has been supplying the RSF with military aid. Satellite imagery and flight records reportedly indicate that Emirati aircraft have transported arms to RSF-controlled areas through Chad’s Aéroport International Maréchal Idriss Deby in Amdjarass. The UAE has denied these allegations, claiming the flights were for humanitarian purposes.
The United States has also taken action against RSF leaders. In January, the U.S. Treasury Department imposed sanctions on RSF leader Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hemedti, along with seven RSF-linked companies operating in the UAE. Among those targeted was a firm suspected of handling gold smuggled out of Sudan—one of the RSF’s primary sources of funding.
Historical Parallels: Darfur and Genocide Allegations
The atrocities unfolding in Sudan today echo the early 2000s Darfur conflict, during which the Janjaweed militias—widely considered the predecessors of the RSF—were accused of committing genocide against non-Arab ethnic groups. The International Criminal Court (ICC) indicted former Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir for genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity over his role in the Darfur crisis, which left up to 300,000 people dead and displaced 2.7 million.
Sudan’s legal action against the UAE at the ICJ marks a significant step in its effort to hold external actors accountable for their role in the country’s conflict. While the case could take years to resolve, it renews international scrutiny of the alleged flow of arms and financial resources to Sudan’s warring factions.
Legal Implications and Next Steps
As both Sudan and the UAE are signatories to the 1948 Genocide Convention, the ICJ has jurisdiction to hear the case. However, securing a ruling against the UAE would require Sudan to provide compelling evidence that directly links Emirati support to the RSF’s alleged war crimes. The UAE is expected to file a motion for the immediate dismissal of the case in the coming weeks.
The ICJ’s rulings are legally binding, though enforcement mechanisms remain limited, particularly in cases involving powerful states with significant geopolitical influence. As the war in Sudan continues with no resolution in sight, the case could set a precedent for holding external actors accountable for fueling conflicts through proxy forces.
For now, the world watches as Sudan’s legal battle against the UAE unfolds, with the potential to reshape international perceptions of the conflict and further complicate diplomatic relations in the region.
